Description of problem: Deployed 3 ObjectStorage Nodes with the following swift raw disks and swift tripleo parameters: parameter_defaults: SwiftWorkers: 24 SwiftPartPower: 11 SwiftMountCheck: true SwiftRawDisks: {"sda": {}, "sdb": {}, "sdc": {}, "sdd": {}, "sde": {}, "sdf": {}, "sdg": {}, "sdh": {}, "sdi": {}, "sdj": {}, "sdk": {}, "sdl": {}, "sdm": {}, "sdn": {}, "sdo": {}, "sdp": {}, "sdq": {}, "sdr": {}, "sds": {}, "sdt": {}, "sdu": {}, "sdv": {}, "sdw": {}, "sdx": {}, "sdy": {}, "sdz": {}, "sdaa": {}, "sdab": {}, "sdac": {}, "sdad": {}, "sdae": {}, "sdaf": {}, "sdag": {}, "sdah": {}, "sdai": {}, "sdaj": {}, "nvme0n1": {}, "nvme1n1": {}} SwiftUseLocalDir: false sda was not mounted on the objectstorage nodes and instead /srv/node/sda is off the root OS disk: [root@overcloud-objectstorage-0 ~]# lsblk NAME MAJ:MIN RM SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT sda 8:0 0 1.8T 0 disk sdb 8:16 0 1.8T 0 disk /srv/node/sdb ... sdaj 66:48 0 1.8T 0 disk /srv/node/sdaj sdak 66:64 0 465.8G 0 disk ├─sdak1 66:65 0 1M 0 part └─sdak2 66:66 0 465.8G 0 part / sdal 66:80 0 465.8G 0 disk nvme0n1 259:1 0 745.2G 0 disk /srv/node/nvme0n1 nvme1n1 259:0 0 745.2G 0 disk /srv/node/nvme1n1 [root@overcloud-objectstorage-0 node]# df -h /srv/node/sda Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sdak2 466G 3.8G 462G 1% / Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): OSP10 Unclear if OSP11 and maybe OSP12 are affected How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Expected results: format and mount /dev/sda to /srv/node/sda rather than off root OS disk. Mount check prevents the disk from use however this means one less disk per node is actually in use. Additional info:
Alex, can you please retry using prefixed device names (like "/dev/sda" instead of "sda")? Please let us know if that works for you.
Hey Christian, I don't know when the next time I will have hardware on this scale and with this number of disks again to be able to try this. The last kicker is that it is OSP10 so I don't think I will have the opportunity to try this again but I can certainly keep it in mind for the future if I do another Swift deployment and I can try appending the the prefix as you suggest. -Alex